3 must own primes for dx nikon

All right I tried searching the FAQ and it always seems to be all around my question but not exact. So. I am looking to upgrade my current selection of zooms to equal primes. I would love to hear your list of 3 must own primes. I currently have the 50 1.8 and love it except wide open its a little soft but one stop is all it needs to be a great work horse. I would love a few others looking at wider and something with a bit more reach. Looking at sigma 24 1.8 next but interested in the collective thoughts.

 

Thanks,

 

Dallas

<p>hmmm, personally i have the 14-24F/2.8, 24-70F/2.8 and the 70-200F/2.8 NIKOR ZOOMS, But they get very little to no use since i use them on my D700... I love primes and I use these three for my D300S & D7000. The sigma 24f/1.8, sigma 30f/1.4 and nikor 35f/1.8....with those three i do 99% of my shooting. if i had to choose 1 lens, it would be my sigma 30f/1.4...Oddly, i do not own a 50 in nikon mount.</p>

<p>300/f4.0 AF-S, super telephoto on DX, awesome.</p>

<p>24 f1.4G - street-shooter extraordinaire.</p>

<p>60 Micro from portraiture and a macro.</p>

 

<p>You don't say what your zooms are to find the equivalent primes, so I would say (based on my usage), the Nikon 20/2.8 AF-D, you already own a 50, and then the 105/2.8 micro Nikkor AF-D.</p>

<p>Must own primes for DX: 35 mm f/1.8 DX, 85 mm f/1.8, and one that still does not exist: 16 mm f/1.8 DX. Would be the perfect lineup to me.</p>

 

<p>20 f/2.8D, 50 f/1.4G, 135 f/2D DC.</p>

<p>Great suggestions so far. Another "low cost" option I could work with would be Sigma 24mm f/2.8, Tamron 60mm f/2 Macro and Nikon 180mm f/2.8.</p>

<p>On DX I really like my AFS 300/4 AF-D 35/2 and the 10.5 Fisheye. To qualify my choices I'd say "must have" really depends upon what you shoot. Throughout my photo journey I've largely spent most time with longer lenses or wide lenses, mid range focal lengths are only coming to me nowerdays.</p>

<p>I have the AF-D 50/1.4 and never liked it's field of view on DX .....until I went FX. The rest of the focal length range was well enough served by DX pro zooms for me.</p>

<p>I think it depends on what you work with.</p>

 

<ul>

<li>Sigma 30/1.4 or Nikon 35/1.8 for carry around</li>

<li>60/2.8 for portraiture, static macro</li>

<li>85/1.4 for portraiture, headshots</li>

<li>105/2.8 for macro</li>

<li>135/2 DC for portraiture, headshots</li>

<li>Nikon 300/2.8 or 400/2.8 or Sigma 800/5.6 for nature, sports</li>

</ul>

<p>If I had to choose 3 I'd go with the 30/1.4, 85/1.4, 300/2.8.</p>

<p>I think the Nikon prime lens lineup is pretty awkward for DX shooters. For my D80 I had 24/2.8, 50/1.8 and 85/1.8 for a very long time. Only recently did I add a Voigtlander 40/2 to those three, and that takes some of the work away from the 50/1.8, but I'm not convinced it is quite as sharp as the 50 (maybe it's just my technique though). I still miss a 30-35mm lens, as well as something in between the 50 and 85, but I am not planning to make those purchases, because I want to move to FX soon. Unlike most DX shooters, I really don't need anything wider than 24mm, and I could do without the 50mm focal length if I had something in that 30-35 range.</p>

<p>So to sum it up, if I planned to stay with DX, and I had to construct a combo of 3 primes, they would be Nikkor 24/2.8, Sigma 30mm/1.4 and Voigtlander 58/1.4.</p>

<p>OK, this is interesting.<br>

I was also after a few primes for my D300. Awesome camera.<br>

My selection was a 50 f1.8, 85 f1.8 and 105 f2.8 macro. This covers most of my shooting needs. I am also looking at the 35 f1.8 DX but may consider something wider.<br>

I still shoot film with my F4s, so this works well. Maybe a 180 or 300 at the longer end would round this out.<br>

Hmmmm, so many fine lenes, it's hard to know. Only three primes, ......good luck with your selection.</p>

<p>the sigma 30 is pretty much the only must-have prime for DX. as Oliver says, the prime selection is awkward on DX, and these are so many good, compact zooms it's almost extraneous, except if you need fast apertures. even the tokina 11-16 makes more sense on DX than the nikon 14 or 18mm primes.</p>

<p>that said, somehow i ended up with three normal DX primes: sigma 30/1.4, tokina/2.8 macro, and nikon 35/1.8. i'm actually using all three (at different times), which speaks to the necessity of a normal DX lens. the tokina is sharper than both of the others at 2.8, btw, which makes it more utilitarian than one might think initially. i mainly got it because the sigma is horrible at close-focus. in a bokeh-off, i'm not sure which would win, but i do know the nikon 35 would come in third.</p>

<p>everything else i really have covered by zooms, except for longer macro, for which i have the tokina 100. i have the nikkor 50/1.8 and the sigma 50/1.4, but they don't see much use on DX--the 1.8 is really a holdover from before i had a 2.8 zoom, and the 1.4 i use on FX. i may get the sigma 20/1.8 and the 85/1.4 as those make sense on both DX and FX. plus the 20/1.8 takes filters, unlike my current FX UWA, but i'd be giving up a lot of real estate, since my UWA goes to 15mm.</p>

<p>however, if i was prime shopping for DX right now, besides a 30 or 35, i'd probably consider the voigtlander 58, the tamron 60, or the sigma 70, followed by the nikkor 85/1.8 or 1.4, and then the 180/2.8, and then the 300/4. the ultron 40 looks cool, but i dont know that i'd use a MF 40/2 that much, since i have 30 and 50 1.4s. also, i much prefer 30 over 35 as far as focal length on DX. the sigma 24 is supposed to be the best of their W/A primes, but for me the 20 makes much more sense.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>20/2.8, 50/1.4, 180/2.8 Nikkors. if your camera accepts AF lenses, or else get AF-S lenses.</p>

<p>I'd add the Tamron 90 macro to the list. It's very sharp, makes a great portrait lens and (except for extreme situations) you'll never be annoyed because you're too close to a subject to attain focus.</p>

<p>Depending on your focal preferences you can pick from this list:</p>

<ul>

<li>CV 20/3.5 - MF, little lens, performs well on DX</li>

<li>Sigma 30/1.4 - low light, walk around</li>

<li>Tamron 60/2 -macro</li>

<li>Nikon 85/1.4 D (1.8 D) - portrait</li>

<li>Nikon 180/2.8 - lightweight unbelievable good tele</li>

</ul>

<p>If you force me only on a three lens primes kit for DX, I'd pick a 24, a 85 and the 180 and I can survive.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>3 must own primes for dx nikon</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sorry, I can't come up with even one. The only DX prime I own is the 10.5mm fisheye, but that is clearly not for everybody. Other than that, I mainly use very long fixed lenses and macro lenses on my DX bodies; again, those are not for everybody.</p>

<p>For those who use consumer DX bodies, the one "prime" lens to get is probably the 35mm/f1.8 AF-S DX. It is not the greatest lens around but provides a lot of value for $200.</p>

<p>I'm not sure there are 3 "must have" primes on DX since no one makes a 16/17mm prime. For me it looks like this:</p>

<ul>

<li>17-55mm f/2.8</li>

<li>35mm f/1.8</li>

<li>50mm f/1.4</li>

<li>85mm f/1.4</li>

<li>105mm/135mm f/2</li>

<li>300mm f/4</li>

</ul>

<p>Reality is that I use primes for portraiture and people photography, not landscapes, and the 17-55mm outperforms most of the lenses within its zoom range with the exception of the new f/1.4G primes that I cannot justify the cost of. (24, 35, 50) However, if I could only choose three primes for my bag it would likely be these three... at a total cost close to USD $3500.</p>

<p>Just my 2 cents<br>

RS</p>

<p>If we only knew what kind of thing the OP tends to photograph, our answers might have meaning and usefulness.</p>

<p>Depends on what price ranges you are talking about.</p>

<p>If money for lenses were no object, but I were still restricted to DX, I would use the Nikkor 24mm f/1.4 as my main lens, and the Noct-Nikkor 58mm f/1.2 Ai as my portrait lens. I would probably add a Nikkor 135 f/2 DC as a moderate telephoto. If you need something longer and can stand the weight, the Nikkor 200mm f/2 AF-S VR lens is amazing on any format. However, with the price of lenses in that kit, you'd be better off with a D700. I know this is controversial here, but I would contend that DX is not relevant for professional use except for some very specific long-telephoto wildlife applications. In almost all instances the higher quality per pixel of an FX camera trumps any perceived "pixel density" or "total pixel count" arguments.</p>

<p>So if one is talking about more reasonable consumer budgets, the Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 is the first, natural choice. However, I find that lens a little long for my tastes on DX, and would prefer the focal length of the Nikkor 24mm f/2.8 AF-D. When I used a DX camera, however, I employed the Nikkor 28mm f/2 Ai-S lens, which I prefer for its speed and optical quality. I must say that despite a general dislike for Sigma lenses, the optical quality of Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is excellent, just the lens is not as mechanically reliable as Nikkor lenses. The Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 lens is not too expensive (especially if your camera can focus with the older, cheaper but still excellent AF-D version) and makes a terrific portrait lens on DX. The Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 AF-D lens can be found used relatively inexpensively. Less expensive still in the telephoto range would be the Nikkor 200mm f/4 Ai lens, or a more flexible, if slower, 70-300mm zoom.</p>

<p>If I was starting from scratch on DX, I'd probably go with a 24, 30 or 35, and180/2.8. The 4th lens I would add would be a 55 or 60 macro.</p>

<p>Dallas, just as Luis mentioned, you didn't say what you tend to photograph, so whats going to work for one person may not work for you at all. For me, a 35 1.8, 50 1.8, 105 Macro and a 180 2.8. Throw in an 11-16 or equivalent zoom and it's probably all I need. If you are left wondering, find a source to rent some primes (if I knew of one, I'd recommend it, sadly I don't) and try them out.</p>

<p>There is no "must". As said already, depends too heavy on what you want to do.<br>

For myself, the 3 primes I use the most (DX user): 24 f/2.8, 35 f/1.4, 105 f/2.5. I never got the point of a 50mm on DX and to me is the least must-have of them all. Others like it - there you go: your must-have is my don't-want.</p>

<p>I currently own the following primes and I am exclusively shooting DX; some of the lenses listed are "left-overs" from the film era (the ones in bold are the ones I purchased after I went DX digital:<br>

<strong>10.5/2.8 DX</strong>, 20/4 AI, 20/2.8 AF, <strong>24/2.8 AF</strong>, 28/2.8 AI-S, <strong>35/1.8 DX</strong>, <strong>50/1.8 AF</strong>, <strong>85/1.8 AF</strong>, 105/2.5, <strong>Sigma 150/2.8 Macro</strong>, leitax-converted Apo-Telyt 180/3.4, <strong>300/4 AF-S</strong>. The only other Nikon "DX" prime - the 14/2.8 - would be needed to fill the gap if I was to be restricted to using primes only; but I would take the Tokina 11-16/2.8 over the 14/2.8 anytime.<br>

As Shun pointed out - the 10.5 isn't for everyone and it sees very limited use for me either. The 20mm still aren't very wide on DX and hence see limited use. The 24 was a recent impulse buy to get the 35mm-equivalent FOV on DX; somehow that lens doesn't impress me much though; I like the 28/2.8 AI-S better for all situations that don't require AF. The 35/1.8 is the only one I would stamp as "must have"; I purchased it reluctantly but it has grown on me since. I have no specific use for the 50/1.8; though I can envision using it together with the 85/1.8 and the 105/2.5 for portraits. The Sigma 150 was chosen over the Nikon 105/2.8 VR because of the larger working distance and to fill in as a medium tele. The 180 is inherited and has come in handy on several occasions - it's my 180/2.8-equivalent. The 300/4 AF-S again isn't for everyone, most people would choose a zoom instead.</p>

<p>If I were to invest in primes for DX and money wasn't an issue, then I'd get the following 24/1.4, Sigma 30/1.4 or Nikon 35/1.4 AF-S, Voigtlander 58/1.4, 85/1.4 AF-D or AF-S.</p>

<p>The 50mm f1.8 or f1.4 is very useful for low light and close up portrait shots.  However other primes would be more specific to a persons needs.  So I guess my suggestion is to wait until you recognize a significant need for a lens before buying it.

<p>I just switched when I got my D7000. My true prime lens is the Sigma 10-20. The next two are the Nikkor 18-105 and the 70-300. The 10-20 stays on the camera. The others are grabbed as needed. Prior to this mix, a Nikkor 20 was my prime on my D70.</p>